From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Sep 20 16:18:58 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from scientia.demon.co.uk (scientia.demon.co.uk [212.228.14.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A683A14D05 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 1999 16:18:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ben@scientia.demon.co.uk) Received: from lithium.scientia.demon.co.uk ([192.168.0.3] ident=exim) by scientia.demon.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.032 #1) id 11TAcH-0003eT-00; Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:04:53 +0100 Received: (from ben) by lithium.scientia.demon.co.uk (Exim 3.032 #1) id 11TAcF-000436-00; Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:04:51 +0100 Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 22:04:51 +0100 From: Ben Smithurst To: "K. Gunderson" Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ncurses vs. slang and mutt port Message-ID: <19990920220451.A14757@lithium.scientia.demon.co.uk> References: <199909201654.KAA16501@mark.iacan.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.6i In-Reply-To: <199909201654.KAA16501@mark.iacan.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG K. Gunderson wrote: > I note that the mutt port may be built with either ncurses or > slang and am wondering which would be preferred and why? I prefer slang. Why? Well, mutt never seemed to work right in an xterm when build against the system ncurses library (the background didn't show up right). Once I got sick of that, I build Mutt with slang and it works perfectly. A newer version of ncurses may have helped, I never tried that. YMMV though, just try both, and see which is better for you. -- Ben Smithurst | PGP: 0x99392F7D ben@scientia.demon.co.uk | key available from keyservers and | ben+pgp@scientia.demon.co.uk To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message